Matching Items (6)
Description
This thesis examines the Mexican federal judiciary and the problem of corruption in this institution, particularly related to cases of drug trafficking. Given the clandestine nature of corruption and the complexities of this investigation, ethnographic methods were used to collect data. I conducted fieldwork as a "returning member" to the site under study, based on my former experience and interaction with the federal judicial system. I interviewed 45 individuals who work in the federal courts in six different Mexican cities. I also studied case files associated with an important criminal trial of suspected narco-traffickers known in Mexico as "El Michoacanazo." My study reveals the complicated nature of judicial corruption and how it can occur under certain circumstances. I conclude that the Mexican federal judiciary has become a more professional, efficient, and trustworthy institution over the past fifteen years, though institutionalized practices such as nepotism, cronyism, personal abuse of power, and gender inequalities still exist, tending to thwart the full professionalization of these courts and facilitating instances of misconduct and corruption. Although structural factors prevent full professionalization and corruption does occur in these courts, the system works better than it ever has before.
ContributorsFerreyra Orozco, Gabriel (Author) / Provine, Doris M. (Thesis advisor) / Johnson, John M. (Committee member) / Warner, Carolyn M. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
Description
The author examines drug court as a means to reduce recidivism rates for individuals who are addicted to illegal substances. The thesis analyzes the best practices for drug courts in treating addiction and lowering recidivism. In conducting this analysis, the author focuses on the Yuma County Drug Court Program (YCDC). After discussing the major components of the YCDC program, the author reaches several conclusions about the program. The author's conclusions are based in part on a study analyzing the recidivism rates for individuals who participated in YCDC from January 1, 2007 through December 31, 2010. The author concludes that an effective drug court program requires proper screening and assessment using validated assessment tools that ensure delivery of treatment to individuals with high substance abuse treatment needs. In addition, drug courts must include counseling in both sober individual and group settings, cognitive restructuring, life skills training, and frequent interaction with the drug court judge. The author also concludes that drug courts are more successful when they stress accountability and independence by requiring participants to maintain a stable residence and employment. In YCDC these practices lead to 48.4% of individuals participating in the 18-month program having no criminal justice involvement for a period of three years after their exit from the program. Other important outcomes showed that well over 90% of the participants' drug tests were negative and 87% of the participants were employed. The author concludes that the YCDC program provides a good model for drug courts seeking to lower recidivism.
ContributorsGould, Anna Elaine (Author) / Chisum, Jack (Thesis director) / Carr, Natasha (Committee member) / School of Nutrition and Health Promotion (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2018-05
Description
Contemporary research has examined the relationship between determinate sentencing reforms and unwarranted punishment disparities in states and the federal criminal justice system. Recent investigations suggest that legal developments in federal sentencing—namely, the High Court’s rulings in U.S. v. Booker (2005) and Gall/Kimbrough v. U.S. (2007) which rendered and subsequently reaffirmed the federal guidelines as advisory—have not altered disparities associated with imprisonment outcomes. Punishment disparities following Booker and Gall, particularly racial and ethnic disparities, have been linked to Assistant U.S. Attorneys’ (AUSAs) use of substantial assistance departures. What remains unanswered in the literature is whether the changes in AUSAs’ decision making following the landmark cases has enduring effects and whether the effects are conditioned by defendants’ race/ethnicity and the type of case (guidelines cases or mandatory minimum cases), and whether the use of substantial assistance varies across U.S. District Courts.
Accordingly, these questions are examined using sentencing data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, coupled with data from the National Judicial Center, U.S. Census Bureau, Uniform Crime Reports, and Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. This study looks at 465,476 defendants convicted from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2010 across 89 federal districts. A series of multilevel discontinuity regression models are estimated to assess the short-term and long-term effects of the Booker and Gall/Kimbrough decisions on AUSAs’ use of substantial assistance departures, accounting for contextual differences between federal district courts.
The results show that AUSAs are less likely to seek motions for substantial assistance immediately and in the long term in the post-Booker period but are more likely to seek substantial assistance in the long term in the post-Gall/Kimbrough period. These effects, however, are restricted to the models that include all cases and guidelines cases. The interaction models show that Hispanic defendants facing a mandatory minimum sentence are less likely to receive a substantial assistance departure immediately and in the long term following the Court’s Booker decision. Moreover, the use of substantial assistance varies across federal districts. The results are discussed in relation to their implications for theory, courts and sentencing policy, and future research on punishment outcomes.
Accordingly, these questions are examined using sentencing data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission, coupled with data from the National Judicial Center, U.S. Census Bureau, Uniform Crime Reports, and Interuniversity Consortium for Political and Social Research. This study looks at 465,476 defendants convicted from fiscal year 2001 to fiscal year 2010 across 89 federal districts. A series of multilevel discontinuity regression models are estimated to assess the short-term and long-term effects of the Booker and Gall/Kimbrough decisions on AUSAs’ use of substantial assistance departures, accounting for contextual differences between federal district courts.
The results show that AUSAs are less likely to seek motions for substantial assistance immediately and in the long term in the post-Booker period but are more likely to seek substantial assistance in the long term in the post-Gall/Kimbrough period. These effects, however, are restricted to the models that include all cases and guidelines cases. The interaction models show that Hispanic defendants facing a mandatory minimum sentence are less likely to receive a substantial assistance departure immediately and in the long term following the Court’s Booker decision. Moreover, the use of substantial assistance varies across federal districts. The results are discussed in relation to their implications for theory, courts and sentencing policy, and future research on punishment outcomes.
ContributorsCano, Mario V., 1982- (Author) / Spohn, Cassia C (Thesis advisor) / Wang, Xia (Committee member) / Wright, Kevin A (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Tempe, and the greater justice system, consistently seeks to re-evaluate its operations and processes to meet the ever-increasing conflicts that are brought into the courts purview. Nationally, municipal courts have seen a decrease in civil matters, however, this is not the case in Tempe. My goal for this project was to assess and reflect on the circumstances that surround civil matters within the municipal court. As a case study, I observed and evaluated several civil court cases. In doing so, I analyzed the ways in which legal consciousness and discourse are used to solve existing civil court matters. I then took these data and considered the ways in which mediation could be used as a justice alternative. In proposing mediation as an alternative, I focus on the ways in which mediation better serves to build positive legal consciousness and address all forms of discourse that can be presented in specific civil cases. Finally, I discuss a strategy that can be used within the Tempe Courts to implement mediation as a long-term problem-solving court strategy.
ContributorsLille, Jacob (Author) / Broberg, Gregory (Thesis director) / Kane, Kevin (Committee member) / Allen, Alexis (Committee member) / School of Politics and Global Studies (Contributor) / School of International Letters and Cultures (Contributor) / School of Social Transformation (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
Despite the constitutional right to trial, the vast majority of defendants waive this right and enter a guilty plea. There are many factors defendants consider when entering a plea, with the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic being the newest factor that may impact defendant decision making. Previous research has found that both innocent and guilty participant defendants were more likely to plead guilty when provided information on COVID-19 outbreaks. Additionally, innocent defendants ranked concerns related to COVID-19 higher than guilty defendants in driving their plea decisions. As the pandemic continues to evolve, so do the various policies and tactics used to reduce transmission rates. This thesis expands on previous work by employing an experimental plea simulation on a college sample to see how varying levels of COVID-19 mitigation strategies in a jail setting impact plea decision making. Varying levels of COVID-19 mitigation efforts on their own did not significantly impact plea decision making; however, presenting COVID-19 related information did increase the willingness to accept a guilty plea more generally. Given the possibility of innocent defendants pleading guilty, this thesis demonstrates the importance of reforming the application of pretrial detention and calls for more oversight into plea negotiations.
ContributorsForston, Jacob W (Author) / Yan, Shi (Thesis advisor) / Mitchell, Ojmarrh (Committee member) / Wilford, Miko (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022
Description
Prosecutors played an important role in the rise of mass incarceration and the perpetuation of racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal legal system in the United States. The progressive prosecution movement emerged as a response to those issues and, although the movement has sparked significant debate, there has been relatively little empirical research examining whether progressive lead prosecutors reduce excess punishment and alleviate disparities. In this dissertation, I partnered with two prosecutors’ offices with progressive lead prosecutors to help fill that gap. Using case processing records obtained from both offices (all adult criminal cases initiated between 2017-2022), I found that prosecutors under progressive lead prosecutors tended to be less punitive in charging and plea-bargaining, but their less punitive approach did not eliminate disparities. While larger plea-discounts under one of the progressive lead prosecutors eliminated the racial disparity in that decision point, disparities in case declination/dismissal, diversion, and felony downgrade decisions remained, even under the more progressive administrations. From interviews with line prosecutors, supervisors, and the lead prosecutors in both jurisdictions (N=43), I found that prosecutors in these offices faced barriers to implementing reform both from within their office, in the form of the principal-agent and mid-level manager problems, and from outside of the office, in the form of resistance from judges, law enforcement, and some segments of the public, as well as a lack of cooperation from defense attorneys. Broadly, my findings highlight the fluid nature of power within courts and the tendency of court communities to seek homoeostasis and minimize reforms, even when those reforms originate from within the court community.
ContributorsBowman, Rachel (Author) / Gould, Jon (Thesis advisor) / Spohn, Cassia (Thesis advisor) / Mitchell, Ojmarrh (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2024